I've been on a bit of a "sabbatical", so forgive me.
Our politics policy is, to be blunt, "in the eye of the beholder". I wish I could make a hard and fast rule as it was years ago before I became admin. That policy was "zero tolerance" for political discussion. I wanted to allow politics to a certain extent AS IT PERTAINS TO RAIL.
It's a fine line. I understand Eolesen's points, Andrew's points, Daybeers, and Ryanov's.
To be clear, it is not a one-sided policy. Whether it's arguments against "Open Borders", or "Paths to Citizenship", to funding for infrastructure, to Orange man bad, to Trump won, matters not. As far as the board goes I am apolitical.
My policy is politics on the board MUST pertain to rail. In my judgment, Eolesen's original post did pertain to why this is happening ON AMTRAK.
Also, even if it related to rail, it can't be full of hyperbole', as noted above. Perhaps it was a tad hyperbolic, perhaps not. Hyperbole' doesn't mean a strong opinion. A blanket statement that "So and so is incompetent and going to ruin the country" is political, whether true or not.
I also have issue with the back and forth on whether it constitutes a violation or not. That distracts from the conversation. If you feel someone has crossed beyond the "neutral zone" of rail discussion into a political statement, report the post (as I noticed it was), or PM me or the mods. Don't respond, as then it turns into a political argument.
I value feedback. As my first point notes, it's a gray area, and we're not perfect.
In order to move the discussion forward, I did delete some posts for that reason only.
Thanks for the opportunity to address this issue.
Jeff
ryanov wrote: ↑Tue Oct 12, 2021 3:59 pm
Guess time will tell whether this new amnesty for political posts only applies to posts decrying open borders or whether all Amtrak adjacent political options are in play. I guess it only makes sense, as Amtrak itself is governed by politics.